Hunters in the Crosshairs

About the Authors

Hunters always have feared that
gun-control activists had more in mind than a self-professed
mission to "keep weapons out of the hands of criminals." They've
always sensed that the ultimate goal was to eviscerate the Second
Amendment and ban hunting altogether.

Until recently, it seemed hunters were
just being paranoid. But, as the jokesters say, it's not paranoia
if they really are against you. And to judge by recent events in
New York and Texas, "they" -- gun-control advocates and their
fellow travelers -- do indeed seem to be taking aim at hunters.

New York has a large, vibrant hunting
community outside its metropolitan areas. Assemblyman Alexander
Grannis, who is from the nation's largest metro area, has drafted a
bill that could, if passed in its present form, make all hunting
illegal in the Empire State. The text of New York State Assembly
Bill 1850 reads, in part: "A person is guilty of aggravated cruelty
to animals when … he or she intentionally kills … an
animal or wild game [or] wild birds."

You don't have to be a National Rifle
Association die-hard to see the danger in a bill that makes pursuit
of game, "so as to capture or kill," a felony with a minimum
one-year prison sentence and a $5,000 fine. Advocates, of course,
claim this is merely a means to criminalize the torture of animals.
But the phrase "intentionally kills," in this context, clearly
could apply to hunters as well as those who would mistreat animals
for fun.

This would be ironic. Hunters are
among the most conservation-minded Americans. They make up large
portions of groups such as Ducks Unlimited and the Izaak Walton
League. As such, they do a lot of the actual work needed to
maintain habitats and manage the species.

But that's not good enough for another
New York assemblyman. Felix W. Ortiz, a Democrat from the hunting
hotbed of Brooklyn, has proposed a bill (AB 4306) that would create
a state office to "study, develop, encourage and provide assistance
for non-lethal management of wildlife." Ortiz's concern for
the wildlife of his district would result in taxpayers funding the
radical political agenda of the anti-hunting movement.

An attempt to criminalize hunting also
has even taken root in Texas.Rep. Toby Goodman, a Democrat whose
district lies between Dallas and Fort Worth, has introduced House
Bill 326, which would make it illegal to "cause bodily injury to an
animal." Again, it sounds harmless enough. No sane person favors
beating up animals. But what is to stop this from becoming a law
against all hunting?

Texas law already forbids what most of
us think of as cruelty to animals. And under current law,
uncaptured wild creatures are not defined as protected animals.
Bill 326, however, would eliminate this explicit hunting exemption
and define an animal as any "nonhuman mammal [or] bird." Make no
mistake: Goodman is trying to outlaw hunting. He's trying to make
it a criminal offense, punishable by a sentence of up to one year
in prison and a $4,000 fine.

But Americans can fight back. Indeed,
they already are:

Last November, Alaskan voters rejected a
proposal to ban bear hunting with bait, and Maine voters rejected
proposals to ban bear trapping and hunting with bait or
hounds.

In 2002, voters in Connecticut and Iowa
defeated proposals that would have over-expanded the definition of
animal cruelty.

Meanwhile, Alabama, California, Minnesota,
Virginia and Wisconsin have passed constitutional amendments to
ensure hunting and fishing rights. Pennsylvania could be next: Rep.
Matthew Baker has proposed an amendment that would guarantee the
right to hunt and fish in the Keystone state. Arkansas and
Tennessee are considering similar amendments.

This breaks with centuries
of legal doctrine. Under traditional American law, a criminal
conviction requires both criminal intent (mens rea)and a
criminal act (actus rea)-- i.e., premeditated murder, not
premeditated duck hunting. Reasonable people can disagree over the
meaning of the Second Amendment, but it is the rare American who
doesn't recognize the right to hunt.

These lawmakers are attempting to chip away at
our rights. That's wrong, and it's up to all of us to watch our
legislatures and be ready to step in when they try to go too
far.

Trent England is
a policy analyst and Steve Muscatello is a researcher in the Center
for Legal and Judicial Studies at The Heritage Foundation.